Engaging Men of Diverse Racial and Ethnic Groups With Advanced Prostate Cancer in the Design of an mHealth Diet and Exercise Intervention: Focus Group Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Healthy diet and exercise can improve quality of life and prognosis among men with prostate cancer. Understanding the perceived barriers to lifestyle change and patient preferences in a diverse cohort of men with prostate cancer is necessary to inform mobile health (mHealth) lifestyle interventions and increase health equity. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a multisite study to understand the preferences, attitudes, and health behaviors related to diet and lifestyle in this patient population. This report focuses on the qualitative findings from 4 web-based focus groups comprising a racially and ethnically diverse group of patients with advanced prostate cancer who are on androgen deprivation therapy. METHODS: We used grounded theory analyses including open, axial, and selective coding to generate codes. Qualitative data were analyzed as a whole rather than by focus group to optimize data saturation and the transferability of results. We present codes and themes that emerged for lifestyle intervention design and provide recommendations and considerations for future mHealth intervention studies. RESULTS: Overall, 14 men participated in 4 racially and ethnically concordant focus groups (African American or Black: 3/14, 21%; Asian American: 3/14, 21%; Hispanic or Latino: 3/14, 21%; and White: 5/14, 36%). Analyses converged on 7 interwoven categories: context (home environment, access, competing priorities, and lifestyle programs), motivation (accountability, discordance, feeling supported, fear, and temptation), preparedness (health literacy, technological literacy, technological preferences, trust, readiness to change, identity, adaptability, and clinical characteristics), data-driven design (education, psychosocial factors, and quality of life), program mechanics (communication, materials, customization, and being holistic), habits (eg, dietary habits), and intervention impressions. These results suggest actionable pathways to increase program intuitiveness. Recommendations for future mHealth intervention design and implementation include but are not limited to assessment at the individual, household, and neighborhood levels to support a tailored intervention; prioritization of information to disseminate based on individuals' major concerns and the delivery of information based on health and technological literacy and communication preferences; prescribing a personalized intervention based on individuals' baseline responses, home and neighborhood environment, and support network; and incorporating strategies to foster engagement (eg, responsive and relevant feedback systems) to aid participant decision-making and behavior change. CONCLUSIONS: Assessing a patient's social context, motivation, and preparedness is necessary when tailoring a program to each patient's needs in all racial and ethnic groups. Addressing the patients' contexts and motivation and preparedness related to diet and exercise including the household, access (to food and exercise), competing priorities, health and technological literacy, readiness to change, and clinical characteristics will help to customize the intervention to the participant. These data support a tailored approach leveraging the identified components and their interrelationships to ensure that mHealth lifestyle interventions will engage and be effective in racially and ethnically diverse patients with cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05324098; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05324098.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,012 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».